[Congressional Record: December 13, 2007 (Senate)]
[Page S15452-S15453]
CIA DESTRUCTION OF INTERROGATION RECORDINGS
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it seems that every week there is a new
revelation about how this administration has engaged in activity that
is not consistent with American laws or values when it comes to the
issue of torture. Last week, CIA Director Michael Hayden acknowledged
that Central Intelligence Agency officials destroyed videotapes of
detainees being subjected to so-called ``enhanced interrogation
techniques.'' These techniques reportedly include forms of torture like
waterboarding. The New York Times reported, ``The tapes were destroyed
in part because officers were concerned that video showing harsh
interrogation methods could expose agency officials to legal risks.''
The CIA apparently withheld information about the existence of
interrogation videotapes from official proceedings, including the 9/11
Commission and the Federal court hearing the case of Zacarias
Moussaoui. General Hayden asserts that the videotapes were destroyed
``in line with the law,'' but it is the Justice Department's role to
determine whether the law was broken.
Last week I asked Attorney General Mukasey to investigate whether CIA
officials who covered up the existence of these videotapes violated the
law. To his credit, the Attorney General has begun a preliminary
inquiry.
This week there is a new revelation. The CIA has already acknowledged
videotaping interrogations of detainees in CIA custody. Now it appears
that there may be videotapes of detainees who the CIA transferred or
rendered to other countries to be interrogated.
According to the Chicago Tribune, in February 2003, the CIA detained
a man named Abu Omar in Italy. The CIA then took Abu Omar to Egypt and
turned him over to the Egyptian government. Abu Omar claims he was
tortured and that his Egyptian interrogators recorded, ``the sounds of
my torture and my cries.''
In response to this story, CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said he
could not ``speak to the taping practices of other intelligence
services.'' Notice what he did not say. He did not say whether the CIA
is aware of foreign countries recording interrogations of detainees who
were transferred to them by the CIA. In fact, if the CIA sends a
detainee
[[Page S15453]]
to a foreign country for the purpose of interrogation, it seems
reasonable to expect that we would monitor the interrogation by video
or audio recording or by some other means.
Why are we sending detainees to other countries to be interrogated in
the first place? Under the Bush administration, the CIA has reportedly
transferred detainees to countries that routinely engage in torture so
that these detainees can be interrogated using torture techniques that
would not be permissible under U.S. law. The administration calls this
practice rendition. Others call it by a different name outsourcing
torture.
The Torture Convention, which the United States has ratified, makes
it illegal to transfer individuals to countries where they are likely
to be tortured. The administration has said that it stands by this
legal prohibition.
However, the administration has said that it will transfer a detainee
to a country that routinely engages in torture if the State Department
receives so-called ``diplomatic assurances'' that the detainee will not
be tortured. Based on diplomatic assurances, the administration has
reportedly sent detainees to countries that systematically engage in
torture, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. Some of these
detainees, like Abu Omar, say that they were then tortured in these
countries. Now there may be video or audio taped evidence of that.
Even with diplomatic assurances, should we be sending people to
countries like Egypt to be interrogated? Every year, our State
Department issues Country Reports on the human rights practices of
countries around the world. Here is what the most recent Country Report
on Egypt says:
Principal methods of torture . . . included stripping and
blindfolding victims; suspending victims from a ceiling or
doorframe with feet just touching the floor; beating victims
with fists, whips, metal rods, or other objects; using
electrical shocks; and dousing victims with cold water.
The State Department claims that it monitors compliance with
diplomatic assurances. Experts point out that it is very difficult to
monitor whether a country has kept its promise not to torture someone.
Now it appears that there may be recordings to help the State
Department make this determination.
This week's news raises many questions:
Have recordings been made of interrogations of detainees
who were rendered by the CIA to foreign countries?
Were these recordings made at the request of the CIA?
Are these recordings in the possession of the CIA?
Have these recordings been destroyed by or at the request
of the CIA?
Do these recordings contain evidence that detainees were
tortured?
Has the State Department reviewed these recordings to
determine whether foreign countries have complied with their
``diplomatic assurances'' not to torture detainees who we
transfer to them?
Yesterday, I sent a letter to CIA Director Michael Hayden to ask him
about the CIA's involvement in these recordings. I also sent a letter
to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asking her whether the State
Department has reviewed these recordings to determine whether detainees
we have transferred to foreign countries were tortured. And, finally, I
sent a letter to Attorney General Mukasey asking him to expand the
Justice Department's inquiry into the CIA torture tapes to cover
recordings of detainees who the CIA sent to foreign countries for the
purposes of interrogation.
I am glad that Attorney General has opened a preliminary inquiry into
this issue. Now comes the difficult part getting to ground truth.
Unfortunately, there certainly will be more revelations to come. It
will be a long time before we get to the bottom of this torture
scandal. I fear it will be even longer before we undo the damage done
to America's image and our values.
____________________